Master Principle

The Master Principle, Part One

Oneness of God Series

By John Taylor; 31 March, 2006

At heart the Oneness of God is a practical principle with implications
for every aspect of life, however mundane. Call it the Master
Principle. Judaism taught the Oneness of God in legalistic terms, as
heart and soul of the Ten Commandments, making love into a law. Jesus
Christ broadened the concept, making it into a principle of the mind
and a personal virtue by setting it into a parable,

"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and
love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the
other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon." (Matt 6:24)

You could call this the Parable of the Boss, or even, in view of the
mention of love and hate, the Parable of the Monogamous Spouse. Our
relationship with a single boss or a single spouse is a function of
love, and the One God is love.

A good boss can offer not only money but also a stable workplace,
assurance of future security, and a single, consistent set of goals
and expectations over many years. A well treated worker naturally
feels gratitude and reciprocates with loyalty. When there are more
than one boss (or lover), loyalty is divided. Usually, especially when
the two bosses do not agree in every way (and who does?), less
goodwill is generated and compensation for services tends to reduce to
mere money.

The result of two bosses at odds with one another? Stress is increased
in the workplace for all concerned. No matter how much money changes
hands, nothing can make up for divided loyalties and a tense work
environment. As the saying goes, without your health, nothing else
matters. A study reported in the media over the past week indicates
that what used to be called "sick building syndrome" is not the fault
of the building but in fact is the result of a toxic work environment.
The stress and tension in these locations literally makes workers
sicken and die.

Relations with God are the reverse of divided, they are by nature
singular. They extend into eternity and are ends in themselves. Since
we have only one heart, the One either predominates or is overwhelmed
by lesser considerations. Mammon, ruler of avarice and greed, offers
the only alternative, many divided loyalties, plus gain. Gain boils
down to monetary remuneration, which is instrumental, a means towards
other, lesser ends. Hence the conclusion of the parable, "ye cannot
serve both God and mammon."

It is not well known in these parts that the Qu'ran also propounds a
version of this parable that builds upon and extends the parable of
Jesus in important ways. Rodwell, one of the earliest translators and
still among the best, renders the parable like this,

"God setteth forth the comparison of a man with associates at variance
among themselves, and of a man devoted wholly to a man. Are these to
be held alike? No, praise be to God! But the greater part of them
understand not." (39:30)

This wording implies that the worker may not be a slave but perhaps
one of several associates in a large partnership, albeit a dissension
ridden one. However a later translator, Yusuf Ali, maintains the
possibility that the "man" may be in a master-slave or worker-employer
relationship.

"Allah puts forth a Parable -- a man belonging to many partners at
variance with each other, and a man belonging entirely to one master:
are those two equal in comparison? Praise be to Allah! But most of
them have no knowledge." (Q39:29)

The implication is clear, a worker can and should be loyal and
grateful to a single benefactor. If that happens friendship rather
than naked power predominates. This cordiality is impossible when
there is more than one boss, especially when they fail to maintain
friendship, unity or even civility among themselves. The force and
vitality in society come from our ability to unify, to feel and act as
one. The Oneness of God teaches this, albeit invisibly. Nobody can see
or conceive of God, but He is palpable, a spirit that can be sensed.
It is every bit as obvious as its reverse, a toxic workplace. As John
said,

"No man hath seen God at any time. If we love one another, God
dwelleth in us, and his love is perfected in us. Hereby know we that
we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his
Spirit." (I John 4:12-13)

The point of the Qu'ranic version of the parable is that only God is
legitimate "whole owner" and the only effective group of mortals is a
"wholly owned subsidiary" of His Spirit. Consider the wording of this
third translation, by Marmeduke Pickthall, of this same Qu'ranic
parable,

"Allah coineth a similitude: A man in relation to whom are several
part-owners, quarrelling, and a man belonging wholly to one man. Are
the two equal in similitude? Praise be to Allah! But most of them know
not." (Q39:29, Pickthall)

We notice two things here, one, what we just noted about complete and
partial ownership. Only a united, single boss can summon complete
loyalty and wholehearted friendship from her workers. All serve the
One, and all obey. When His love predominates we are "wholly owned" by
God and outward equality or inequality cease to be invidious. Freedom
from envy is part of happiness. A happy worker will be able to leave
this life and look back on his service to that one boss with pleasure,
equanimity and satisfaction. All debts were repayed. That is being
"wholly owned" by the God of love.

The second aspect highlighted here is the question, "Are the two equal
in similitude?" There is no equality, no comparison, no possible
similarity of one to many, of unity to disharmony. A worker in a toxic
workplace cannot in any way equal a single, focused, directed worker.
The first, no matter how hard he tries, only wastes his efforts and
suffers harm as recompense. The second wins in every way; he does good
and benefits from participating in the only true superpower, the One.
The Bab said,

"Say, the power of God is in the hearts of those who believe in the
unity of God and bear witness that no God is there but Him, while the
hearts of them that associate partners with God are impotent, devoid
of life on this earth, for assuredly they are dead." (Selections, 153)

In sum, the big difference between Jesus's parable and that of the
Qu'ran is that the first compares one boss with two, and the second
compares one boss with many partners or co-owners. As is evident in
the Bab's saying, from the Qu'ranic parable we get the important
expression, "associating partners" with God, which is a better way of
describing idolatry in its modern incarnations as ideology or
so-called "isms."

Is this difference so big? Sometimes I think it is and sometimes not.
As Plato's dialog Parmenides lays out at length, there is only one and
many; the one and two resolves into the one and many. But then I think
that there is only one, it has all power, there is nothing else. This
reminds me of Leibniz and his invention of the binary system, which
resolves all numbers into either one or nothing. I will strive to
arrive at a resolution to this question in Part Two of this master
principle series tomorrow. I hope I succeed because I would really
like to know.

--
John Taylor

badijet@gmail.com